OBJECTIVE: The availability of next-generation sequencing and identification of multiple cancer-related genes has caused a shift away from single gene testing towards multi-gene panel testing for hereditary cancer syndromes. However, the utility of panels in individuals who previously underwent non-informative genetic screening has yet to be evaluated. We aim to evaluate the use of rescreening and results of multi-gene panels in this rescreened population. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records for patients who had previously undergone genetic testing and then underwent multi-gene panel testing at a single institution between 9/2013 and 11/2014. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-seven patients with prior genetic testing underwent multi-gene panels. One hundred and four patients (82%) had a history of cancer and 118 (93%) had at least one family member with cancer. On primary testing, no pathogenic mutations were detected and 10 patients (8%) were found to have variants of uncertain significance (VUS). On repeat multi-gene panel testing, nine patients (7%) were found to have a pathogenic mutation and 53 patients (42%) were VUS not identified on prior testing. CONCLUSIONS: Seven percent of patients with non-informative primary testing were found to have a pathogenic mutation with multi-gene panels, suggesting that there is a potential benefit to be gained from rescreening. However, 42% of patients were found to have new VUS with panels, a result that can cause patients anxiety without clear clinical implications.
OBJECTIVE: The availability of next-generation sequencing and identification of multiple cancer-related genes has caused a shift away from single gene testing towards multi-gene panel testing for hereditary cancer syndromes. However, the utility of panels in individuals who previously underwent non-informative genetic screening has yet to be evaluated. We aim to evaluate the use of rescreening and results of multi-gene panels in this rescreened population. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records for patients who had previously undergone genetic testing and then underwent multi-gene panel testing at a single institution between 9/2013 and 11/2014. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-seven patients with prior genetic testing underwent multi-gene panels. One hundred and four patients (82%) had a history of cancer and 118 (93%) had at least one family member with cancer. On primary testing, no pathogenic mutations were detected and 10 patients (8%) were found to have variants of uncertain significance (VUS). On repeat multi-gene panel testing, nine patients (7%) were found to have a pathogenic mutation and 53 patients (42%) were VUS not identified on prior testing. CONCLUSIONS: Seven percent of patients with non-informative primary testing were found to have a pathogenic mutation with multi-gene panels, suggesting that there is a potential benefit to be gained from rescreening. However, 42% of patients were found to have new VUS with panels, a result that can cause patientsanxiety without clear clinical implications.
Authors: J Brian Szender; Jasmine Kaur; Katherine Clayback; Mollie L Hutton; June Mikkelson; Kunle Odunsi; Cara Dresbold Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Ilana Solomon; Elizabeth Harrington; Gillian Hooker; Lori Erby; Jennifer Axilbund; Heather Hampel; Kara Semotiuk; Amie Blanco; William M P Klein; Francis Giardiello; Lori Leonard Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2017-01-26 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Paul S Appelbaum; Wylie Burke; Erik Parens; David A Zeevi; Laura Arbour; Nanibaa' A Garrison; Vence L Bonham; Wendy K Chung Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2022-06-02 Impact factor: 11.043
Authors: Sidrah Shah; Alison Cheung; Mikolaj Kutka; Matin Sheriff; Stergios Boussios Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Belinda Vicuña; Harold D Delaney; Kristina G Flores; Lori Ballinger; Melanie Royce; Zoneddy Dayao; Tuya Pal; Anita Y Kinney Journal: J Community Genet Date: 2017-10-02